From ... From: Erik Naggum Subject: Re: Are macros really a neccessity, or a coverup of language deficiencies? Date: 2000/04/27 Message-ID: <3165818279680358@naggum.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 616280300 References: <390371F0.36455F4E@makif.omer.k12.il> <3165647335532305@naggum.no> <3907660B.CCA3ECD2@yahoo.com> <1e9pulo.1ueryh2128131kN%bparsia@email.unc.edu> <3907FD4A.D138F88D@yahoo.com> mail-copies-to: never Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@eunet.no X-Trace: oslo-nntp.eunet.no 956829678 7872 195.0.192.66 (27 Apr 2000 10:01:18 GMT) Organization: Naggum Software; vox: +47 8800 8879; fax: +47 8800 8601; http://www.naggum.no User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Apr 2000 10:01:18 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp * Peaker | In my question, I was aware that LISP macros allow lower-level | access to the syntax (changing the way things are parsed), this is not true. you seem to be confusing reader macros with macros, as many complete novices do. | My theory is, that the high-level syntax is extendible, when the | basic object model is extendible enough, and that the low-level | syntax need not change, which is why I dislike LISP's way of | providing means to change the low-level syntax. no, you dislike it because you don't understand it on its own terms, but rather want to force it into a different model. you must make a distinction between disliking the model and its expression before you can proceed usefully. but since you appear to dislike the Lisp model a priori, I don't think there's much point in proceeding in this direction. just find a language whose model you like and use it productively. #:Erik